Peggy Wallace

RAND Corporation, Santa Monica, California, United States

Are you Peggy Wallace?

Claim your profile

Publications (3)6.85 Total impact

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Rigorous guideline development methods are designed to produce recommendations that are relevant to common clinical situations and consistent with evidence and expert understanding, thereby promoting guidelines' acceptability to providers. No studies have examined whether this technical quality consistently leads to acceptability. To examine the clinical acceptability of guidelines having excellent technical quality. We selected guidelines covering several musculoskeletal disorders and meeting 5 basic technical quality criteria, then used the widely accepted AGREE Instrument to evaluate technical quality. Adapting an established modified Delphi method, we assembled a multidisciplinary panel of providers recommended by their specialty societies as leaders in the field. Panelists rated acceptability, including "perceived comprehensiveness" (perceived relevance to common clinical situations) and "perceived validity" (consistency with their understanding of existing evidence and opinions), for ten common condition/therapy pairs pertaining to Surgery, physical therapy, and chiropractic manipulation for lumbar spine, shoulder, and carpal tunnel disorders. Five guidelines met selection criteria. Their AGREE scores were generally high indicating excellent technical quality. However, panelists found 4 guidelines to be only moderately comprehensive and valid, and a fifth guideline to be invalid overall. Of the topics covered by each guideline, panelists rated 50% to 69% as "comprehensive" and 6% to 50% as "valid". Despite very rigorous development methods compared with guidelines assessed in prior studies, experts felt that these guidelines omitted common clinical situations and contained much content of uncertain validity. Guideline acceptability should be independently and formally evaluated before dissemination.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 02/2008; 23(1):37-44. DOI:10.1007/s11606-007-0440-9 · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) frequently experience adverse drug events involving intravenous medications (IV-ADEs), which are often preventable. To determine how frequently preventable IV-ADEs in ICUs match the safety features of a programmable infusion pump with safety software ("smart pump") and to suggest potential improvements in smart-pump design. Using retrospective medical-record review, we examined preventable IV-ADEs in ICUs before and after 2 hospitals replaced conventional pumps with smart pumps. The smart pumps alerted users when programmed to deliver duplicate infusions or continuous-infusion doses outside hospital-defined ranges. 4,604 critically ill adults at 1 academic and 1 nonacademic hospital. Preventable IV-ADEs matching smart-pump features and errors involved in preventable IV-ADEs. Of 100 preventable IV-ADEs identified, 4 involved errors matching smart-pump features. Two occurred before and 2 after smart-pump implementation. Overall, 29% of preventable IV-ADEs involved overdoses; 37%, failures to monitor for potential problems; and 45%, failures to intervene when problems appeared. Error descriptions suggested that expanding smart pumps' capabilities might enable them to prevent more IV-ADEs. The smart pumps we evaluated are unlikely to reduce preventable IV-ADEs in ICUs because they address only 4% of them. Expanding smart-pump capabilities might prevent more IV-ADEs.
    Journal of General Internal Medicine 02/2008; 23 Suppl 1(S1):41-5. DOI:10.1007/s11606-007-0414-y · 3.42 Impact Factor
  • Source